And the new timeline, that was a big change! (since 2.4 or 2.45 iirc)
Right, but that doesn't change the loading time in between turns, it just changes the number of turns. Right?

I also had this problem (check like forty pages back), but I solved it in a slightly less difficult fashion. I simply made desert impassible, and made the Urals uncrossable except in in one area, which I put a barbarian spearman (with a fortress) to hold. Worked perfectly, as no one settled the area until a more historically accurate time. My solution was never included because it left desert civs stuck unless you preplaced roads for them... which I did.

If we ever stop demanding stuff from Rhye, I will set my game up like that again because I really liked how well it worked; its not like people CAN cross deserts without roads in any significant numbers.

I haven't played 2.62 extensively yet but in my 2 test games as the Austrians I have popped 8+ goody huts and have not gotten barbarians once. I think changing the barbarian uprisings may have somehow broken the huts.

I would say just put some ocean in somewhere between England and Greenland, or find a way to force galleys to sink in heavy water (oceans and seas) because I made it over there in 270AD... didnt feel like trying before.

There is ocean since the fixed ("C") version of 2.62. Try to re-download it.
I didn't know that seafaring civs can end one turn in the sea. Now that I know, I've corrected the strait.

I also had this problem (check like forty pages back), but I solved it in a slightly less difficult fashion. I simply made desert impassible, and made the Urals uncrossable except in in one area, which I put a barbarian spearman (with a fortress) to hold. Worked perfectly, as no one settled the area until a more historically accurate time. My solution was never included because it left desert civs stuck unless you preplaced roads for them... which I did.

I remember this change. That is a good idea and very useful, but had many collateral effects in North Africa and Arabia. Overall, it is too radical.

I can add some more barbarians at the beginning in that area, there's still some space far from the starting locations. After all, I can put there as many as I like: I don't have to be worried of loading times anymore.

I mean: more units, not more camps. Because each camp is 25 gold, and there's the risk of inflation.

Strange, your mod has random maps only, right?
A random 160x160 with 16 civs should not be that slow. Earth maps are instead very, very slow.

I use both Random and World Maps(the world map I'm using is based on yours btw...thankyou).

make a new settler called "steppe settler" and have LM terrains for that area. (may be a bit of work). This steppe type settler would be good up to the industrial age. Then regular type population 4 settlers or whatever fromt then on. This will give time for the area to be settled. and will allow for razing and rebuilding cities in the industrial & modern ages. for none steppe civs. Give this settler unit to the russians & mongols for sure, possibly even the persians & indians, heck you could even make an arguement for the byzantines and china/korea could have historically settled that region.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand completely what you mean. What would the "steppe settler" have different from the other settlers?

Right, but that doesn't change the loading time in between turns, it just changes the number of turns. Right?

But changing the nuber of turns affects the loading time!
Shrinking just a bit the timeline caused having in 1900 the time you'd have to wait in 1700.
All the techs costs were updated (reduced) for this reason.

May I have a look at your modifications of 2.33?

BTW, I thank you for your services, I'll ask you if I need something.

And that will be soon.
At first I wanted to make the Xpack step-by-step, keeping everything public and posting it here.
But I've seen that for example the DyP team (which is developing Rise'n'Rule) has a private forum: I've already revealed many tricks, and perhaps it's better to keep features more private, to avoid copies, just like them.
Now, we all can discuss of the mod here, but about posting the BIQ, I'd make the middle choice: no public (posting it here, for anybody), no private (I keep it until finished): the best is IMO a group of 5-6 users, whom I send the biqs. Call it "Rhye's of Civilization development team" if you want.

In this group you (Aeon) would be very useful if you adore researching (me too!) and writing (instead I suck at writing).
I'd like Blasphemous, Chutchy Husky, Horton and Iztvan to be in, if they can.
If any of these people hasn't free time, I'll call somebody else who's been browsing this thread for quite a long time or gave good suggestions (Asclepius? Jaguar? Khift?)

Again, the others will not be excluded by the development. I've always been listening to everybody, and I'll keep doing it. We will discuss here.
I'd be happy to beta test the expansion pack of the mod. I have fairly free weekends.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand completely what you mean. What would the "steppe settler" have different from the other settlers?

I think he want to explain that this kind of settler can only settle in special kind of areas.
This areas will be estimate by some kind of LM terrain, so that only some civ´s who can build this kind of settler will be able to settle in this kind of LM terrain.

The guy who was making that "Conquer the Earth" mod implement something interesting in the form of impassible mountains, basically, this is to prevent the European civs from expanding into Asia, to keep Asia isolated as it was historically for hundreds of years.

I haven't played 2.62 extensively yet but in my 2 test games as the Austrians I have popped 8+ goody huts and have not gotten barbarians once. I think changing the barbarian uprisings may have somehow broken the huts.


Correct.

The new system has some collateral effects:
-goody huts do not produce barbarians. And this is good in some aspects, as sometimes barbs popping out too early crippled some civs that never recovered.
-barbarian units may leave their camp. Well, this doesn't change the important thing: to have to gold you have to kill them, sooner or later.
-Each uprising, camps will pop up in lands often impossible to reach (far Siberia or Alaska). Instead of popping up full of swordsmen, they'll pop up empty. You can take the 25 gold.

This is a small price to pay: it's really worth the fact that another big problem is gone.
As written in the readme, uprisings are realistic in random maps, because you'll get attacked at the new age by a horde. But in case of static maps, the camps placed in the realistic locations are destroyed by Middle Ages. 400+ unit will stand in their place, far from any city and any realistic spot.
Remember: 1'23'' in 1900!!! Before it was 2:30 - 3 minutes

The guy who was making that "Conquer the Earth" mod implement something interesting in the form of impassible mountains, basically, this is to prevent the European civs from expanding into Asia, to keep Asia isolated as it was historically for hundreds of years.


I have impassable moutains, too. But there's plains and desert under the Uralis.

I'd be happy to beta test the expansion pack of the mod. I have fairly free weekends.

Very well. I need people who:
-know very well civ3 and knows if something's unbalancing
or
-know very well history and can clarify some doubts.

and
-have some time to give feedback. Not just - download and play. Or download an post an alternative version - ahem - :rolleyes:

I need the emails, as I'll send dy by mail the link to the biq.
I've already Asclepius'.

I need yours and Balsphemous's

And Horton, are you in? I consider your opinion very important.

I have impassable moutains, too. But there's plains and desert under the Uralis.

But when you make the plains LM plains that can only be settled by this "stepped settler" there will be no more western europeans in the ural area.

I think he want to explain that this kind of settler can only settle in special kind of areas.
This areas will be estimate by some kind of LM terrain, so that only some civ´s who can build this kind of settler will be able to settle in this kind of LM terrain.

If that's the meaning, it can't be done. If a terrain is settleable, it is by all the settlers.

I sent you a PM with my email address.
Am I right in understanding the new barbarian system is simply that there is no "basic barbarian unit" and no "advanced barbarian unit" but instead just units that you placed belonging to A Barbarian Chiefdom?

Yes. If you look in the editor, you'll find warriors in Europe and Asia, archers in America, Spearmen in America, North Africa and Asia, Horsemen in Russia, Camelry in the Asian desert (a real threat: they ignore desert movement cost!), dark-skinned spearmen in Africa, Chariots in Middle East.
And galleys in the locations where ancient piracy or seafaring tribes were.

If that's the meaning, it can't be done. If a terrain is settleable, it is by all the settlers.

I have no plan how to create new unit´s. But it must be a total new kind of settler with a special ability. i like the idea.

btw
It is the first time I played a world map, till this day, into the modern area.
In fact of the loading times a give all the others a break.
I like this mod very much. There are still 28 civ´s and comfortable loading times between the turns.

Thanks a lot Rhye. :thumbsup:

Great! I think I'll get back to playing tomorrow... Haven't played in a week or two, been too busy studying and playing Diablo II... Such an addictive game (though not as much as civ, thank goodness.)

Never planned Diablo 1 or 2, just Black Isle and Biowere's Dungeons and Dragons Computer RPGs like Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights. Any good?

I checked the read-me for this mod, seems like its a basic mod with few additions unit and tech wise, and lots of unique additions like new colors and terrain. I understand why you'd disagree with the "New Techs, New Units=Good" approach...I always thought that it depended on the techs and units being added...

Never planned Diablo 1 or 2, just Black Isle and Biowere's Dungeons and Dragons Computer RPGs like Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights. Any good?


Some years ago I completed Diablo 2 with the druid and NWN. I stopped playing Baldurs Gate at the beginning.
Finished the old Ultimas :goodjob: and Gothic 1.

I still have to play Gothic 2 and Knights of the old republic, but I have no time...why? :D




I checked the read-me for this mod, seems like its a basic mod with few additions unit and tech wise, and lots of unique additions like new colors and terrain. I understand why you'd disagree with the "New Techs, New Units=Good" approach...I always thought that it depended on the techs and units being added...



Most of the people think in that way. And judge my mod at the first look: "only 3-4 units added, compared to 100+? No good."
However the Xpack with all the units will be done to satisfy the common opinions, and to match with Rise and Rule :p
But my additions won't be "put in any unit that I can".
I have a basic plan to make a decent pack. But with a little more effort I can make a great pack. But this doesn't depend on me.

I have no plan how to create new unit´s. But it must be a total new kind of settler with a special ability. i like the idea.

btw
It is the first time I played a world map, till this day, into the modern area.
In fact of the loading times a give all the others a break.
I like this mod very much. There are still 28 civ´s and comfortable loading times between the turns.

Thanks a lot Rhye. :thumbsup:

The only ability you can give to a settler is "to settle". Nothing more.
If a terrain is settleable, its LM is too. And it is by all the settlers.

I sent a PM with my email.

The only ability you can give to a settler is "to settle". Nothing more.
If a terrain is settleable, its LM is too. And it is by all the settlers.

ahh. Sorry I don´t know that.

Diablo 2, with the expansion, online, is one of the best gaming experiences available IMHO... The single-player is not that awesome really (especially act 3 - yeuch!)
The core gameplay is pretty simple (click the baddies fast then click the stuff they drop) but the skill system and the item system make the whole thing very complex and the game sometimes forces you to make very tough decisions...
NWN is also great online but in a very different way... Haven't played that one in a while tho I will probably return to it sometime.
Don't know about the Baldur's Gate series, I played a bit of the first installment and got sick of it, never got around to playing the second which I heard is great.
One really good Black Isle game is Planescape: Torment. I truly regard it as one of the greatest masterpieces of the gaming industry. The plot is excellent, the many dialogues are ingeniously written and really manage to give you the feel of the world even without voice-overs (for the most part). And what a world it is! Planescape is one of the most amazing worlds ever written for any RPG ever. You've really gotta play in it to understand. The biggest tragedy is that Torment was put out of print a couple years ago (it never sold well), so it's extremely hard to get a legal copy of it nowadays. If you can find it, buy it. If you like any computer RPGs at all, and if you like reading fantasy books to some extent, it's a must-play. (I say you should like reading fantasy books because of the huge amount of text in the game which makes it alot like a highly interactive book - albeit a very very good one.)
Rhye, I reccommend you play KotOR at all costs (and yes - that includes keeping us waiting on your mod). It's an absolutely fabulous game and very well-polished... I've invested over 35 hours in it so far (with two different chars - restarted after 12 hours with my first) and I intend to finish the whole game at least once (should take another 50 hours minimum, probably more).
And as I see you guys like fantasy stuff, please take a look at the link in my signature that leads to the thread of a fantasy mod concept I'm working on. I could use a few minds to brainstorm with. In fact, I can't proceed without them.

I think the best single player game is Gothic (and Gothic 2 is even better).
Kotor seems to me an improvement of NWN.
I liked Diablo 1 & 2, but I don't consider them RPG. Just action games.

And browsing the abandonware, the Ultimas are the best. Ultima Underworld 1 & 2 were even better than the original series.
I played Ultima Online for one year (2000/2001)

BTW, did you know that I made a mod for Civ2 in 2001?
It was about Ultima Online, and contained a graphics that's very similiar to RoC's.
And it deserved to be in the Hall of Fame 2001 :D
http://it.geocities.com/rhye_pd/main.html

And as I see you guys like fantasy stuff, please take a look at the link in my signature that leads to the thread of a fantasy mod concept I'm working on. I could use a few minds to brainstorm with. In fact, I can't proceed without them.

mmh, I'm not much into fantasy mods. You should look at Master of Myrror and Warhammer mod to have some examples.

I dunno about Gothic, never played those two, but I do hear they are good.
KotOR has nothing much to do with NWN... Very very different style of game, completely different universe, different point of view (surprising the kind of difference it makes in gameplay and in feeling of immersion.)

I suggest this frequently, so I will suggest it again. If we exchange screen names, idea transfer could be very rapid. Mine is in my common profile.

Yeah I remmer that you dont like the desert idea. but I did. I STILL am trying to find a way to make deep desert terrain or something, but its just not gonna happen. oh well.

HAhaha yeah didnt Heart of Troy or whatever do that? Stole your mod and made a CRAPPY scenario out of it! OmG that was soooo wrong ;p

England going interestingly, def not as easy as it used to be. Perhaps a new combat class of ships inserted with the caravels? It is simply impossible to protect my people after galleys and before MoW. Not cool when youre an island civ tryin to fight off the Bloody Germans (they attacked me before I could start my buildup; I was in the midst of a colonization drive for upcoming resource). Oh well, its their fault they Started WWI

Sides are: Germany, Austria, Greece VS. England, France, Rome, Russia

If THAT isnt scary, what is???

year is 1588, leaders have Cav, I am 2 turns from MoW.

I had a thought:

restrict settlers to Feudal ones for colonial civs, and later ones for other civs
Give each civ a set number of settlers to fill in a prescribed amount of space, which would vary for each with larger numbers for... say China, and smaller for the Netherlands, but make sure that it is enough to fill their "national space"

This would make it so that the game developed into pretty much the real world situation

Barbarians would cause some significant problems if they got in amongst the AI though...

What do you think? Also too radical?

Also, I could set up a private forum for mod development on invisionfree if you want

I have a good deal of experience with that, having once been a hardcore NationStates player.

If you did thqat, you'd have to add a small wonder called "Colonialism" that spits out settlers in the late game... or something like that anyway.... hrmm... Maybe I'll do that in my own mod... ;)

Or better yet (and easier IMO) would be to make settlers become available with Democracy, Comunism or Fascism... Start eevryone with say, 5 settlers or so, then let the game progress with small civs until the colonial/imperial explosion of modern govts.... sort of off topic I know... this will do anything BUT solve the problem of western european civs rushing into siberia... but it will be interesting.... it will mean there will probably be room in North America to be colonized when the Euros discover it and due to their tech advantage they can....

Instead of settlers, pre-placed cities might be best... Then you can give Russia and other traditionally sprawling civs a leg up.

The Setlers would have to have adequate protection from barbarians. Otherwise a whole bunch could be wiped out. Other then that it sounds interesting.

I am against preplaced cities, because I like to be able to pick my locations, but also because it would mean that the civ that started with the most would win.

Besides, what time period would you set it up for? The Renaissance city placement would be entirely different from the Classical period or the Industrial.

And Rhye, I KNOW youve read this idea before because I remember saying it before, but I am just gonna push it again. I figure you might change your mind ;p

Call them nomads, give them a D of 2 and an O of 1, and make them unproducable.

Oh well.. I dont share the view that more cities=more power... Resources/terrain plays a pretty big role. It doesn't have to be more for the pre-placing anyway... you can give everyone the same amount and start them all off at 10 base culture... 5 cities @10 culture can take up quite alot of space...

But regardless, this is one aspect of RoC I'm unsatisfied with. I didn't really realize until this discussion, but I don't care for the increased cost of settlers. I understand the reason and its a good one. I just don't like the result.

For me, it means every time I'm approaching a tech that will up the cost of settlers, I rush some settlers... The AI, I'm sure, doesn't know to do this... So its just another point where the AI will show its weakness... The AI has enough weaknesses already. I prefer it when mods don't introduce new ones.

I had a thought:

restrict settlers to Feudal ones for colonial civs, and later ones for other civs
Give each civ a set number of settlers to fill in a prescribed amount of space, which would vary for each with larger numbers for... say China, and smaller for the Netherlands, but make sure that it is enough to fill their "national space"



I am against preplaced cities, because I like to be able to pick my locations, but also because it would mean that the civ that started with the most would win.

Besides, what time period would you set it up for? The Renaissance city placement would be entirely different from the Classical period or the Industrial.

:confused: You seem to contradict yourself there...

I mean, i thought the whole point was historical acuracy and correct territory... so then, why not pre=place cities in the correct locations as well? I guess I don't understand where you draw the line there... doesn't really matter though... I suppose I honestly dont care too much for the idea of not being able to choose my city sites either. I just dont see the difference between more cities vs more settlers for certain civs.

I would be in favor of making settlers available later, yet only giving maybe two of them to start with. Then, a small wonder which autoproduces settlers could be available from the begining. Maybe every 30 turns to produce? It would take some testing.

I also like the idea of making settlers available with the more advanced govs.

I know it sounds contradictory (and probably is ;p) but heres my reasoning.

If you preplace a city right, its there the whole time, producing, growing etc. It has to have a defender right from the start, and probably a worker or a network of roads. This would probably give at least a decent advantage, but more importantly would be a prebuilt scenario, which would require tweaks, changes, manipulations, and constant moving of cities.

A bunch of settlers is just that. It allows people to choose their spots, it keeps things from getting too preplaced while maintaining a semihistorical balance, it will require less work... and basically I know that Rhye wont do it anyway so whats the point of arguing ;p

Gunner dude, heres a quote for you:

"God fights on the side with the heaviest artillery"
-Napoleon

;p

Rhye thank you for a such a great mod.

I have some observations and suggestions.

Observations:
1. Workers take too long to complete work, and or
2. Not enough workers are produced.
3. Jungle areas are basically never cleared or improved.
4. Resources that are not easy to attain are usually left alone by the AI.
5. The AI makes threats to give something or else but unless you are about to crush their last city you cannot do the same to them.

Suggestions:
1. Instead of wiping out a nation, there should be an option to have it as a vassal or statelite after certain criteria are met.
2. The AI should not make stupid decisions, for example Israel decaring war on Russia. Small nations should be loath to go to war.
3. The trade advisor should make suggestions regarding the top three trade routes, eg "You have diamonds that Ottomans, India and Spain want."
4. Replace the swordsmen with a specialised barbarian hierarchial structure. The swordsmen look out of place in all but Europe.
5. You should be able to provide military assests to other AI, such as tanks.
6. Cities should be able to revolt and form a new country like in call to power.
7. The AI should remember if you were generous to it. At the moment there is no loyalty.
8. The Dutch need to be stronger sea farers. They don't seem to colonise Indonesia. Maybe they can have a random colony at a certain point in time to encourage them. Like wise with the British in Australia. The AI needs a lot of help here.
9. Nations go to war over what? There should be a reason and a desired outcome stated. War is never a random event.
10. China and India should have a greater population.

Just some ideas to consider and discuss. Thanks again for your enjoyable mod.

Those things just arnt possible. Im pretty sure and if were would take alot of work.

Also, I could set up a private forum for mod development on invisionfree if you want

I have a good deal of experience with that, having once been a hardcore NationStates player.


No, thanks, I don't want to leave CivFanatics. Thunderfall has been very kind, offering FTP space for free, and I'll keep supporting the site.



I suggest this frequently, so I will suggest it again. If we exchange screen names, idea transfer could be very rapid. Mine is in my common profile.


??

restrict settlers to Feudal ones for colonial civs, and later ones for other civs
Give each civ a set number of settlers to fill in a prescribed amount of space, which would vary for each with larger numbers for... say China, and smaller for the Netherlands, but make sure that it is enough to fill their "national space"


first: I'll keep repeating this all through the development of the Xpack.
One of my guidelines is not to do anything unfair.
For this reason:
-no additional units to some civs only
-no preplaced cities to Babylon, Greece or Egypt like tacfun requested
-no civs with more UUs than the others. 31 UUs will be
-in case of flavour units, I've already a project that preserves the original strtucture of the units
-this includes that every civ have the same settlers

And apart from that, how would you do that? Giving all the settlers at the beginning?

Or better yet (and easier IMO) would be to make settlers become available with Democracy, Comunism or Fascism... Start eevryone with say, 5 settlers or so, then let the game progress with small civs until the colonial/imperial explosion of modern govts.... sort of off topic I know... this will do anything BUT solve the problem of western european civs rushing into siberia... but it will be interesting.... it will mean there will probably be room in North America to be colonized when the Euros discover it and due to their tech advantage they can....

Instead of settlers, pre-placed cities might be best... Then you can give Russia and other traditionally sprawling civs a leg up.


That wouldn't solve the problem.
European 5th settler would go to Siberia.

And I prefer leaving preplaced cities to the scenarios.

Rhye thank you for a such a great mod.

I have some observations and suggestions.

Observations:
1. Workers take too long to complete work, and or
2. Not enough workers are produced.
3. Jungle areas are basically never cleared or improved.
4. Resources that are not easy to attain are usually left alone by the AI.
5. The AI makes threats to give something or else but unless you are about to crush their last city you cannot do the same to them.


1,2,3: This is the way I want it to be. You just need to know that terraforming is very difficult, especially in the first 2 eras.
Otherwise jungles would become grasslands, deserts would be entirely irrigated, and there would be rich cities there. Instead in this way the distribution of the cities is similar to the real world.


Suggestions:
1. Instead of wiping out a nation, there should be an option to have it as a vassal or statelite after certain criteria are met.
2. The AI should not make stupid decisions, for example Israel decaring war on Russia. Small nations should be loath to go to war.
3. The trade advisor should make suggestions regarding the top three trade routes, eg "You have diamonds that Ottomans, India and Spain want."
4. Replace the swordsmen with a specialised barbarian hierarchial structure. The swordsmen look out of place in all but Europe.
5. You should be able to provide military assests to other AI, such as tanks.
6. Cities should be able to revolt and form a new country like in call to power.
7. The AI should remember if you were generous to it. At the moment there is no loyalty.
8. The Dutch need to be stronger sea farers. They don't seem to colonise Indonesia. Maybe they can have a random colony at a certain point in time to encourage them. Like wise with the British in Australia. The AI needs a lot of help here.
9. Nations go to war over what? There should be a reason and a desired outcome stated. War is never a random event.
10. China and India should have a greater population.

Just some ideas to consider and discuss. Thanks again for your enjoyable mod.

Yes you should ask this to Firaxis for Civ4 :lol: I asked to Firaxis myself some of these points, some months ago.

Nono I didnt mean leaving the forum here, you just said that you didnt want everything about your mod to get out before. Thats why I offered. It would be completely private, and therefore up to you want you wanted to tell about it.

Haha this site is the only thing keeping me sane with my workload. Stealin a minute here and there with it is like my only joytime hahahaa that sounds so bad.

Whatever ;p

Hope I didnt piss anyone off, an Rhye I knew you were against taht idea, dont know why I bothered to bring it up again ;p

I suggest this frequently, so I will suggest it again. If we exchange screen names, idea transfer could be very rapid. Mine is in my common profile.

??
He has a point, if we would keep in contact via ICQ/MSN/AIM/Y!IM at least for the xpack developement it would keep ideas flowing much better than they do here.

This is civ. As such, you should start with a single settler. Rhye has carefully made it so that the world doesn't get completely populated by 1500 BC. I would like for it to stay that way, and preplaced cities or lots of settlers will not help.

oh, I see.
Well, you know my ICQ. It's 77282794.
I can send you the link to the biq via ICQ or via email (I still haven't Aeon's).
But I think that it won't be a priority.
I just don't want to give the biq to everyone while it is in development, and in the same time I want somebody to test it (especially the religions: they will be in only if they will be useful and if AI makes a good use of them).
Apart from that, I don't think that there are much secrets :)

Hope I didnt piss anyone off, an Rhye I knew you were against taht idea, dont know why I bothered to bring it up again ;p

Don't worry ;) I hope you understand my point of view

aeon221@hotmail.com or eeline@thehill.org

your choice, at least one is in my user profile.

Thanks Rhye!

My SN for AIM is *GASP* Aeon221 (WHAT a SURPISE!!!)

I have an ICQ number too but I need to ReDL it to use it... Ill get right on it ;p

243070645 for ICQ... and MSN IM doesnt work at my school, so no point in using that.

Does this mod only let you play on the wrold map, or can you also play on a random map?

there's a separate biq for the random map. You can use it, but the mod loses many of its features.

"God fights on the side with the heaviest artillery."You know, that has a certain... ring to it. Sounds like you could stuff it into a rock song or some such.

Let me say this: The Master of Orion series is of the devil, for it stole me from this! But, I'm back. I guess.




Rhye: Would you consider, for the XPack, expanding the repertoire of early naval units? Seeing as most civs are stuck with boring little 1/1/3 Galleys from mid Ancient to late Medieval ages, early naval warfare is about as entertaining as watching flies f***! As I've said before, only two new units (Trireme (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=89370) and Galleass (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=44515)) and a little rearrangement of mid to late naval stats to give some play room for the Trireme and Galleass. I recommend putting them at Map Making and Gunpowder.

I honestly feel that this would add alot to the game. It isn't a very difficult thing to do, yet it would add a good deal of depth to some otherwise lifeless pre-modern naval warfare.

About Poland and the UUs to use: Poland was a relatively large power in the pre-nationalism era, and had some good Cavalry. Of course, we all know that we need more horse UUs, but I feel it fits with Poland just as it does with most other East European countries. I direct you towards the Cossacks Conversion thread, (Which you seem to have already noticed, due to your choice of the Napolean king sprite,) where there is a very nice picture of a "Polish Winged Hussar (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=913211&postcount=12)" (Full thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=50408&page=1&pp=20)). That could most certainly fit the bill for a Polish UU in the standard mod.The pride and glory of the cavalry, its mailed first, was the Husaria, the winged cavalry. Operating in regiments of about 300, the front rank carried an astonishing lance of up to twenty feet in length (thus outreaching infantry pikes and allowing the Husaria to cut straight through an enemy square). They also carried a sabre or rapier with a six - foot blade (another weapon which was unique to the Poles!), as well as a pair of pistols, a short carbine, a bow and arrows and a variety of other weapons, the most lethal of which was the "czekan", a long steel hammer which could go through heads and helmets like butter!

The ultimate weapon of the Husaria was psychological. As well as wearing helmets, thick steel breastplates and shoulder and arm guards the Husaria also wore wings; great wooden arcs bristling with eagle feathers attached to the back of the saddle or the shoulders. Over their shoulders they wore the skin of a tiger or leopard as a cloak. Their harnesses, saddles and horse-cloths were embroidered and embellished with gold and gems and their long lances were painted with stripes like a stick of rock and decorated with a five-foot-long silk pennant which, along with the wings and jingling jewellery, made a frightful sound (described as "an evil hiss" by some) and sight during the charge. They even sometimes painted their horses red and white!

Another thing I found about Polish military was that their well trained and well armed musketmen had roughly 10 times the amount of firepower than average during their heyday. The infantry was lightly dressed without helmets or armour and armed with musket, short sword and hatchet. Only one man in eight carried a pike. In the 1550's a Polish regiment of 200 men could fire 150 shots in five minutes (contemporary Spanish brigades of 10,000 men could only deliver 750 in the same time)! Polish infantry possessed ten times greater firepower on a man-to-man basis than standard European infantries.Sounds like UU material to me! Musket replacement, two additional attack or defense (I don't know if you'll have Musketmen offensive or defensive...) combined with a 10 shield increase in cost sounds right to me. I'm sure you could find a good animation - the Unit forum seems full of different musket infantry units. If I find one, though, I'll let you know.

Where'd I get this? Off of Google, of course! (http://www.kasprzyk.demon.co.uk/www/Army.html) A couple other sites seconded his claims, although I won't bog you down with quoting them.

Either way, it sounds to me like the Polish deserve a spot in this mod. They, currently, aren't represented by anyone, although the Byzantines could be represented by three different civs. (Rome + Greece = Byzantines in the Medieval age, since Byzantine culture was Greek to the point that even the official language was Greek, and the Ottomans could represent them afterwards.)

Forgive me for being such a nagger about this thing, but I am hardheaded, and don't give up easily. ;)

I agree with Khift, naval warfare should be expanded throughout the ages... It's a realy shame with all that sea that we don't get to enjoy it very much. If there were some early naval units that are made for combat only, perhaps we'd see something more interesting going on in the Mediterranean in the ancient age and across the globe later on in the age of sail...
EDIT: I also agree that the Byantines must go (if only for the fact they are already reperesented) and the Polish should replace them.

Two final things: I really really like this new barbarian system. Not only does it decrease loading times, it removes two great aggravations - barbarians spawning from "goody" huts, and the infinite supply of barbarian warriors that flow from their camps, while still giving them enough strength that you need to be wary of them. Bravo, Rhye!

Also, the Urals should not be much of a barrier. They never really were a barrier - the Appalachians are about as imposing as the Urals are. The biggest thing that kept the East and the West separated was just the vast amount of space between the Urals and China, and even that was breached by the Russians and the Mongols. Isolationist tendencies also helped keep them apart, too. For example: the tallest mountain in the Urals is Mt. Yanchenko at 1740 meters, while generally speaking a "large" mountain is about 6000 meters tall. When you put it in context, the Urals aren't really much more than some glorified hills!

TO be ABSOLUTELY honest, I am in total agreement with you Khift ;p

I have some in game reasons to be with you on this one:

Ottman-Byzantine-Greek crowding is simply horrendous!

Large wasted open area between Russia and Germany-Austria (little lebensraum, or however you spell it ;p) needs somebody to fill it.

Only 1/2 of my ethnicity is in this mod (Italian and German)! I am pushing for 3/4 with the Poles... and maybe later some way to include something Irish? ;p

BTW Khift, dont know if you noticed, but this battle was also fought like forty pages ago. Rhye won it too ;p

I would also vote keep the Greeks, boot the Byzantines (even though I did recreate the Roman Empire with them in one game haha)

AND just as a little bonus you could use that extra galley unit called the Dromon to add some spice to seafaring civs! Take away its transport powers, reduce it to defensive bombard only, and just give it to the seafarers AS IS!

ALSO, England is a pretty interesting late game play! I have colonies throughout the world (most siezed from other civs with my incredibly useful Man of War!) AND a few late wonders (dont bother much with the earlies as they go away too soon) with the amazing production power of the Iron Works, factory, coal plant setup.

Currently I am right on target for 1918 (current year) tech wise, and have managed to keep a clean reputation (apart from an unfortunate incident with a Roman MPP causing me to enter a WW and break a RoP with teh Germans).

I decided to not conquer any country definitively, following historical brisith policy as regards Europe, and am therefore not winning the game per se at this point... but considering how things are shaping up resourcewise, things will soon change as regards that.

Rhye, England is fine when played by a human in the Industrial and Modern ages, but is weak no matter who plays her in the Early and Medieval eras.

France needs some work; in the game I played, it stayed up tech wise, but was unable to reach much in the way of territorial growth (and what few colonies it had... munch munch).

Perhaps other people have different opinions about France? I would suggest a few early growth bonuses, just to help things along in that respect. Small things, like wheat or bonus grasslands, maybe a single cattle added. Just to kick up their production in the short run ;p

You leave those Urals alone! They were a massive barrier in another sense, namely that Europeans did not cross them in any numbers until the cossacks in the early/mid 1600s under Russian command.

However, I have seen Russia develop perfectly in all the games I have played with the new patch, so DONT CHANGE A THING!!! ;p

BTW Khift, dont know if you noticed, but this battle was also fought like forty pages ago. Rhye won it too ;pOhh I know - I was there! I just like being stubborn. ;)

When I played England back in 2.50, it wasn't hard to keep up at all. In the ancient and early medieval eras I do admit to sweating some as my continental friends kept a small lead on me, but during the late medieval the tables turned and I took off. The only thing that kept me from a spaceship victory (Which I had hoped for from the start) was that aggravating 5 turn research minimum. I could research techs in five turns beginning in the early Industrial age! By the time I finally reached the modern age around 2010AD I could leave my research at 30% and still get the intended tech in five turns. Very aggravating, considering it almost cost me victory - I had to pull a diplomatic victory out of my butt to win there, seeing as at 2030 I had six or seven more techs to go before I could build all of the spaceship parts.

Back in 2.42 i thik when i won as Rome Russia got devoured by Germany. As Did France. Though the Entire World helped with that. No one liked Rome in the End because i Killed any Weak Neighbours but hey thats Rome.

-> I want keep Poland for a future possible Civ-Pack.
I disagree with you and consider Byzantines much more important than Poland, and think that the space between Germany and Russia is not that big. They would be another Netherlands, made to be divoured by Germany and Russia (which in fact really happened!).
But I see you're 3 now requesting this. And I remember that the battle for Israel was a "Pirro victory" (I don't know if you know the meaning, it means a very bloody battle with many casualities) for me. It was a very small victory over Sumeria.
Iirc Jaguar you didn't want the civ-pack, right?
But it seems the only was for me to make everybody happy - a pack with 4-5 new civs that include Poland and Sumeria, as an optional biq (FOR THE BASIC MOD).
To be made after the Xpack. It's an easy work for me, very quick to do, but the Xpack has the priority.

-> I know that Urals are low mountains, but barbarian camps position may be very important to obstacle colonization. I've improved the positions a bit in the BIQ I've in my HD (which contains a bit more powerful England). But it's not enough to make a patch.

-> About the galleass and other naval units: I cannot answer at this time.
It would be my intention, but it collides the flavour units project. Well in truth, this projects is still incomplete, and I don't know if I'll put it in the pack.
I'll explain the problem better some other day, not now.
For sure, what I need now is accurate naval history information.
I'd be extremely grateful if some of you posted a timeline of different ships: invented by who - used by who - from #### to ####. I need as much info as you can give me, especially about non-european naval warfare.

I will get on it (AHHH I LEFT MY MAHAN AT HOME!!!) but you need to be more specific!

Everything IS everything, and there is a lot out there, from Quinquiremes to Early Submarines (gotta love the alliteration ;p) so once you specify, I will hunt specifics. I ***think*** I can find a basic naval time line tonite (playing an amazing WWII scenario, mega huge and slow ahh) .

I did not know exactly what to look for, but this is what I came up with. Its pretty comprehensive, should cover most areas, with a few sites intermixed which can link you to pretty much anything else you need. And of course, the infamous GlobalSecurity.org for the modern stuff has pretty much anything you want to know about the modern world's weapons systems.

I think the naval research is covered in general, in specific I am ready and willing, just dont know what to shoot for.

Have fun ;p


http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/1820/WSP/ships.html#galley

Ancient ships (Galley to Galleass)

http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/gen1.htm

Ship Ratings (sail) and info on cannon/crew

http://www.snowcrest.net/jmike/ancientmil.html

ancient warfare (some links on ships, may check later)

http://home.europa.com/~bessel/Naval/Navlinks.html#A

more age of sail stuff, specific vessels

http://www.snowcrest.net/jmike/index.html

large general history area

http://www.snowcrest.net/jmike/war2.html

Comprehensive military history site

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/n0000000.htm#swt

Comprehensive WWI site

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/n0000000.htm#swt

Ships in WW2 All navies except soviet

http://globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/index.html

modern ships US

-> I want keep Poland for a future possible Civ-Pack.
I disagree with you and consider Byzantines much more important than Poland, and think that the space between Germany and Russia is not that big. They would be another Netherlands, made to be divoured by Germany and Russia (which in fact really happened!).
But I see you're 3 now requesting this. And I remember that the battle for Israel was a "Pirro victory" (I don't know if you know the meaning, it means a very bloody battle with many casualities) for me. It was a very small victory over Sumeria.
Iirc Jaguar you didn't want the civ-pack, right?
In English, the phrase is a "Pyrrhic Victory". It's named after the same general, but I suppose the name got changed a little in translation.

I don't think the civ-pack is a good use of your time. Certainly I would play with it if you made it, but I don't think the civ-pack would make anyone much happier. The main benefit of it is that it gives people more strategies to think about, and could keep people interested for a longer time. However, it would force you to balance two separate biqs.

I don't think that the Poles would be another Dutch. The Dutch only have two contiguous cities most games. They have Amsterdam, and a city in Denmark. Then they have a few useless cities in Russia or something. The Poles could likely get 3 or 4 cities together in Eastern Europe.

BTW, I'm in full agreement with the people who want more ships. I think that's a great idea.

I cast my vote for the Polish.If any votes should be issued.
However Iäm not sure they should replace the Byzantines...

The Polish played many key parts from 1000 AD and forward. Many flavour units has also been publsihed beside the Winged Husaria. Units before 1000 AD could be similar to germanic tribes and even Goths. Lots of units in that department as flavour. Many fine Knights from BeBro can be used before the Winged Hussars, that should pop up in the time of Gunpowder.

I too go for more ship units with those fine creations like the Galleass. The standard Civ3 has too little from that Galley up to Medieval sailing ships Caravel, Carrack and Galleons.
A super mod with soo much potentials still left in it.

Have a look at Poland
http://www.fact-index.com/h/hi/history_of_poland.html

the fact that the pack is postponed to after the Xpack means that the basic biq is already definitive and needs no more patches. For this reason once I see that the civ-pack biq is balanced, it will require no updates.
I don't want to discuss Poland's importance, but I think that Byzantines are more important. Maybe it's just a matter of what you studied at school ;)
The civ-pack is the best effert I can do to satisfy these requests.

thanks, aeon.
To be more specific, I need you to write a line for each of the ships contained in civ3 and some other available by unit creators.

I can fill some lines by myself, but something's missing:

name - invented by who - used by who - from #### to ####

Curragh ?
Canoe - native americans only?
Sampan ?
Hokulea
(one oar) Galley - the greeks? - Mediterranean? - ? to 1500
Bireme - the Phoenicians - ? - 700BC to ?
Trireme - ? - Mediterranean? - 500 to ?
Junk - ? - Far east - ?
Kublai ?
Tongkang Singapore only? - ?
Dhow - ? - Arabia only or indian ocean countries too? - ?
Longship - Vikings? - Vikings - ?
Dromon - Greeks or Byzantines? - Byzantines? - ?
Cog - the Dutch - northern Europe - 1000AD to 1400
Hulk/Holk - the Dutch?
Galleass - ? - southern Europe only? - ?
Caravel - the Portuguese - Spanish and Port. only? - 1400 and 1500 (it's a smaller carrack)
Carrack - the Genovese - Spanish and Port. only? - 1400 and 1500
Turtle Ship - Koreans - Koreans - ?
Corvette ? - Europeans only? - ? - (it's a smaller frigate)
Frigate ? - Europeans only? - ? - (it's a smaller ship of the line)
Galleon ? - Southern Europeans only? - ? -
Treasure Ship ? - China only? - ?
Man-o-War ? - Europeans only? - ?
Ship of the Line - ? -
Ironclad ? - Europe and far east? - ?
....


please fill the rest of the "?"

let me point out that Cog is already chosen as the 2nd Dutch UU, and the Longship is Viking's.

I don't want to add all these into the mod, but I need this information anyway, because of the flavour units project.

Now I'm hurrying to the football game, I'll better explain later what I want to do!

Rhye, frankly I wouldn't use the Civ-Pack if you made it cause I'd rather play the Xpack....I'm not saying that the Byzantines are unimportant - ont he contrary, they're very important - but they're already represented by three different civs (Greece, Rome, Ottomans) and their placement is very problematic and in fact entirely voids any chance of Greece making something resembling Alexander's empire and any chance of Rome rising to its historical glory (though the Byzantines can make either of those empires). Same with the Ottomans. The Byzantines are a logistical problem when they are in.
I beg of you, please consider replacing the Byzantines with the Poles (or with anyone else who is nto yet represented) at least in the Xpack if not in the standard game as well.

Longship - Vikings? - Vikings - ?

Very roughly speaking:
Longship - Vikings - Vikings - from 735 AD(*) to 1086 AD(**)

(*) First used in a major raid in 793 AD
(**) Last used in a major raid in 1066 AD

Roger Wilco, if you other guys have time look in the web pages I provided, most data needed is already there.

Guys, poles would be cool, but it looks like an ex-nay as is. However, I bet the case would be stronger if you built a Polish civ PERFECTLY, with leaderhead, cities, traits, history, GLs, UU, etc, and just asked Rhye to integrate it as is.

I have four tests and some homework to study for/do today, so no research for me until tomorrow, unless I get really lucky.

Played as Portugese last night, weak in Iberia conducting colonizations of Africa as per history (haha I play this game as close to history as I can, just because I can, and the ability to do that is soooo cool). Should be able to move in on Brazil soon, hoping I can get enough naval bases to make a push on the Indies and India logical.

Rhye, frankly I wouldn't use the Civ-Pack if you made it cause I'd rather play the Xpack....

I did not give for sure that everyone will use the Xpack and nobody the basic mod, when the Xpack is out.
In that case, there's another possibility. It wouldn't make much sense a civ-pack based on the standard mod, if nobody uses it: a civ-pack based on the expansion would be better.
On the other hand, it would be a smaller pack (max 2 civs), because I can't find 2 UU for some civs (Sumeria for example). So it would become Poland and not much more.
So, my conclusion is that I will put Poland somewhere, depending if I see that when the Xpack is complete, everybody uses it and nobody the basic mod or not.
Anyway it's a problem postponed to after the Xpack.
Even if I agreed that Poland is more important than Byzantium, it would require some time to find the optiumum balancement (because I want to touch the civ strength as little as possible in the add-on), and that would mean beginning on working on the pack later.

Personally I would rather wait a bit extra for the xpack to be completed if it meant we have a better selection of civs. Of course, since I will be testing the pack, my opinion is slightly biased, but I would have still have rathered wait even had you not asked me to test.

EDIT: Rhye, authorize me on ICQ (you asked me "who are you?" and I answered.)

oh, I didn't know you were that one :) You need to ask for authorization again.

I still prefer Byzantines and I want them in the official version; I understand that you and some others prefer Poland and I said I'll satisfy you, adding them after the Xpack.
I'll do it. Sooner or later, I promised to do it. IMO the pack is more important now and comes first.

I promised to do it.


:lol: LOL! Look what I've found!!!!

A zoom in :lol:

I'm downloading Rise and Rule of Kal-El :)

I looked a beta build some time ago and wasn't impressed: I expected much more.
But maybe it was a superficial look.

However I'm sure that this mod with the Xpack will not be inferior :)

I just spent some time looking at some maps, estimating where the Polish capitol would be and approximately how far they would spread and where they would get their resources.

Krakow seems to be the best choice for their capitol. With that in mind, I mentally placed their capitol at the square X:96 Y:38, by two rivers on a plain with a Horse.

I estimate that they would get a total of five cities. One near X:98 Y:32, another near X:102 Y:36, a third near X:100 Y:44, a fourth near X:106 Y:46 with the fifth being their capitol at X:96 Y:38.

Austria would not manage to expand northeast like they usually do, just southeast. Realistic, I would say.

Germany would end up with most of it's bulk along the North Sea. I would personally move their capitol from X:89 Y:33 to X:89 Y:35 in order to allow a city near X:91 Y:29.

Russia would still have a good deal of cities. Even if they don't expand as much southwest, they still have plenty of space to expand elsewhere.

Greece and the Ottomans would get what you would expect them to get. They'd just eat a little further towards mainland Europe, getting about one or two more cities a piece.

The only country that would be weakened by the addition of Poland is Germany. Greece and the Ottomans would definitely benefit, Austria and Russia wouldn't be affected, but Germany could possibly end up with one less city. A move of the Polish capitol from Krakow, the traditional seat of Polish govt to the modern seat of Warsaw (Around X:98 Y:32) could solve that by giving Germany a chance to squeeze a city between Austria and Poland, although it would be a little less historical.

Geographically, this solves more problems than it creates.

The Masovia district? That wasnt till the 1600s though, so no go. Haha that was in a Calvin and Hobbes, KRAKOW KRAKOW! Hahah

I have some spare time before a study date, so I will copy that list and start working on it ;p

Galley - Unireme, Bireme, Trireme, . . .
Droman
Cog
Caravel
Carrack
Galleon (apparently the Man of War is an outgrowth of the Galleon, not the frigate)
Longship
Junk
Galleass

are all on this site with great detail

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/1820/WSP/ships.html#galley


I WOULD copy all the data from it, but you should really just look at it all. It is HIGHLY worth your time, and may ENTIRELY change your perspective on ships implemetation.

Curragh ?
Canoe - native americans only?
Sampan the Chinese - East and SE Asia - ? until nowadays
(one oar) Galley - the greeks? - Mediterranean? - ? to 1500
Unireme Greek and Phoenicians - ? to 700BC
Bireme - the Phoenicians - ? - 700BC to ?
Trireme - ? - Mediterranean? - 500 to ?
Quadriremes and Quinqueremes - Mediterranean - 300BC to the end of the Ancient age
(one oar) Galley Mediterranean only? - dark ages to 1500
Junk - China - ? to 1200AD
Kublai ?
Tongkang Singapore only? - ?
Dhow - ? - Arabia, India and East Africa - ? until 1500
Longship - Vikings? - Vikings - 800 to 1200
Dromon - Greeks or Byzantines? - Byzantines? - 200BC to more than 600AD
Cog - the Dutch - northern Europe - 1000AD to 1300
Hulk/Holk - the Dutch - northern Europe - 1300 and 1400
Galleass - ? - southern Europe only? - ?
Caravel - the Portuguese - Mediterranean only? - 1400 and 1500 (it's a smaller carrack)
Carrack - the Genovese - Spanish and Port. only? - 1400 and 1500
Turtle Ship - Koreans - Koreans - ?
Corvette ? - Europeans only? - ? - (it's a smaller frigate)
Frigate ? - Europeans only? - ? - (it's a smaller ship of the line)
Galleon ? - Europeans only? - ? - late 1400 to early 1800
Baode Luan/Treasure Ship (what's the real name?)? - China - 1500?
Man-o-War ? - Europeans only? - ? (a faster galleon)
Ship of the Line - ? -
Ironclad ? - Europe and far east? - mid 1800 to ?
....

I need to know something more about Middle Eastern and Far Eastern Medieval&Renaissance naval warfare

Bah you just won't read it will you ;p

Everything about the renaissance is there. as is early stuff. I will find out about the middle eastern ships, but I cannot transcribe it all onto this forum as it will eat up all the space!

Hello, Rhye!
I have just played 2.62 with the Incas, and hey, I just love this mod now even better! :) Before I played with around 2.4 and that slowed down to 1-2 mins in the years 1400 or so. Now It is indeed faster and I am in year 2000 and with waiting time around 3 mins in modern times, which I believe is quite fair :) /I have Athlon 1600, 256 RAM, built in Sis VGA graphic card/

Some observations, maybe some corrections needed:

1.
A wine resource appears east of the Andes - well, there seems to be no Civilopedia for it (no texts, pics - just empty blocs), and this wine seems to be not the same as the wine of, say, Rome, Rome could sell me the wine even I have this one... hm?
2.
Below this wine, also east of the Andes mountains there is a tile which supposed to be a marsh tile and behaves like one but by graphics it looks like a grassland! Could you check that?
3.
On the very north of the American continent I once got into a barbarian camp and discovered Carib people where Eskimos should dwell! :))

Soma

Hello, Rhye!
I have just played 2.62 with the Incas, and hey, I just love this mod now even better! :) Before I played with around 2.4 and that slowed down to 1-2 mins in the years 1400 or so. Now It is indeed faster and I am in year 2000 and with waiting time around 3 mins in modern times, which I believe is quite fair :) /I have Athlon 1600, 256 RAM, built in Sis VGA graphic card/

Some observations, maybe some corrections needed:

1.
A wine resource appears east of the Andes - well, there seems to be no Civilopedia for it (no texts, pics - just empty blocs), and this wine seems to be not the same as the wine of, say, Rome, Rome could sell me the wine even I have this one... hm?
2.
Below this wine, also east of the Andes mountains there is a tile which supposed to be a marsh tile and behaves like one but by graphics it looks like a grassland! Could you check that?
3.
On the very north of the American continent I once got into a barbarian camp and discovered Carib people where Eskimos should dwell! :))

Soma


1. That's the 2nd wine resource, which appears later.
When i found that the duplicate resources caused for example dye-to-dye trade, I removed the duplicates (except the horses).
As wine was in America, nobody seemed to notice it, and I forgot to remove it. Now it's time to do it! Thanks.
2. There's a hidden marsh in the lower left. It is inherited from the standard graphics. I'll correct the tile of my graphics, thanks again.
3. There are no barbarian camps there in North America, except those created automatically after the uprisings. And that camps are empty after 2.62. What version are you using?

That means Incas will not have their own wine? Poor fellas...

As for the "eskimo" camps:
I think I use 2.62 - but I will check the files back at home in the evening...
The barbarian camps I found in the very north of America and well (tundra all around) were all empty but numerous, about three or four of them I stepped into and got the 25 gold for each. Never got angry barbs. It was into 17th century or later. Isn't that supposed to be 2.62? :)

Perhaps I've found the key to postponing colonization of Siberia.

I've made a experiment and seen that AI sends a warrior asap to the nearest barbarian camp, and if there isn't a barbarian camp, to the nearest goody hut.
Now, removing the barb units doesn't change this priority. Removing the camp and leaving the units instead changes this: the warrior heads to the goody hut, and ignores the barb. unit, which instead of being attacked, attacks the warrior when it comes near.

For this reasons, limiting the number of the camps and raising the number of the units would mean that barbarians will last much longer.

So you intend to empty it of goodies and camps and just leave barb units?

i don't know it yet. I need some more tests

i don't know it yet. I need some more tests
I can start testing even before the xpack is underway... If you need me to test a biq, just email it to me and I'll get on it when I can. (Provided you tell me what exactly I should test in it.)

Might I suggest horsemen of some type? It would make more sense for the steppe barbs to be horsies!

:spear:

:( it doesn't work...
...the first experiment worked but in the end the result is the same.
Probably some horsement with boosted stats may help. Maybe a 3/2/2 horse archer. But any addition will be Xpack-only

I know this is a groany wish thing, but I really wish that there was a way to preset city locations for the computer so that they would settle in those spots. It would make life SOOO much easier!

I know this is a groany wish thing, but I really wish that there was a way to preset city locations for the computer so that they would settle in those spots. It would make life SOOO much easier!
Well, the closest thing (which I've seen done) is you take a terrain type, make it the only settlable terrain type, and then put it wherever you want a city...
Rhye, having simple Horsemen (with no changes) placed under barbarian control wouldn't be too far-fetched... Or are those already there?

Currentry northern and central Asia is populated by horsemen and camel riders.

Making one terrain type only settleable may limit heavily the player's freedom of choice.
And that wouldn't mean anything: a French or Portuguese settler may still take the spot next to mongols before anyone.

About the pack,
the flavour units project has changed my plans a bit.
I'm in need of middle eastern ships, and the dhow could be useful.

The fact that I already chose the dhow as Indian 2nd UU force me to think of an alternative Indian unit. I have no clue...have you?

Rhye,
I still think you should use the aegis cruiser as an American UU. You are using naval UU for India, and this is a more realistic UU for America as we are the only ones with them, except if we sell them.
Other than that..I have just played thru a second game, this with your latest version, as the Americans. It played extremely well. Excellent work, thanks.

If I use flavour units, India will probably no longer have the Dhow.
And America already has its 2nd UU......................the A-Bomb!

If I use flavour units, India will probably no longer have the Dhow.
And America already has its 2nd UU......................the A-Bomb!
Yeah, but everyone has nukes..plus using it alienates the rest of the world, and nobody has aegis except anyone we sell it to, which at this time is 2 countries, Japan and Australia.

I need info on "Sangara" and "Colandia", two ancient Indian ships



BTW, thanks for the info on the AEGIS Cruiser. In case I have some problems with the A-bomb, I'll consider it as a candidate.

Just a quick note..I am sure you aren't competing or anything :) but it appears to me that your thread has the most posts on the forum, for the length of time it has been here at least :)
Ron

Just a quick note..I am sure you aren't competing or anything :) but it appears to me that your thread has the most posts on the forum, for the length of time it has been here at least :)
Ron


Who said that I'm not competing ;)

I know that this thread has the highest posts/month ratio: about 16 pages per month.
Just to compare: DyP has produced 6 pages/month; TET's mod 4 p/m; Warhammer 8 p/m; The Old Empires 12 p/m; The Great War 15 p/m.
Only Barbarossa seems superior (19 p/m), but as it is only one month old, its statistic isn't much significant.

The warhammer thread is only 8 per month? When I was looking through that thread it seemed more like 8 per day...

8 pages, not posts. Simply divide the pages per the age in months.

Oh. That... that makes a little more sense.

I've found some new links with interesting info.
I could split early ships into oared and non-oared. The higher manouvrability of the oar vessels should be represented by ignoring the coast movement cost (to be increased to 2).

I'm still sure that the 2nd Indian UU must be a ship, possibly a ship used by pirates. They've represented a golden age for Bombay. I only need to know how should I call it and what animation should I use (I can't find anywhere the name of the ship used by indian pirates. All I found is the dhow)

Rhye,

Are you going to update v2.62? Just asking because of you saying that you are fixing marsh tile setting and wine in North America? I also want to work with a completed mod file for a version of your mod. I was thinking of using your mod to create a WW3 game.

KOC

I started a game as Persia on Emperor (chose Random and hoped for a European/Asian civ) and it's going quite well. I popped a settler at around 2700BC and since then I've been in the lead, score-wise, even though I've been sruggling with science since forever... I managed to trade my way into the middle ages right before conquering India (after a pretty smooth conquest of Babylon) and soon I'm going to probably take out the Hebrews for access to the Mediterranean sea (even though I've already made contact with most of the Europeans through exploration and ROPs with Russia and Austria.)
I was surprised to find that I'm doing fine even with only two cities above size 4. Elephants and Camels helped alot. I'm hoping to pretty much conquer my way to spaceship victory by simply being the only one big enough to build it. This should be interesting.

I'm waiting for the new Elephant Archer by DomPedro:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=2198967#post2198967
He said he needs two weeks

If you need starting working sooner, I can give you the biq only

Rhye, thanks but I'll wait for the completed mod or mods. If I undertake the WW3 it will take awhile and I want to start work with a completed mod.

Thanks

KOC

I just had an idea...
Add a tech called Tourism sometime in the late industrial age, and have it make extra commerce appear in famous major sites of tourism... This could add a little extra realism to modern-day economy where sometimes a (small) country's economy can depend almost entirely on tourism (like Israel, for instance.)
Just a thought. :P

Haha, how about making a government called Tourism, where production is hyper limited, but cashflow is intense, and you can build supercheap buildings which add the benefits of stock markets on in addition to the ones you have. Call them Resorts for seaside cities, and Spas for inland ones. Make worker speed really low, and give them no military support (and troop cost of 3), so that they depend almost entirely on stronger neighbors hahahaha

I wonder again, Is there any version for Vanilla 1.29?

->Finlandiaciv:

there are many people asking for the Xpack, four people asking for Poland, and one (you) asking for the Vanilla version.
I promised to do it, but I must give the priority to the other works.

In the meantime, I need 2 answers from you:
1) Would you prefer for Vanilla a basic version or do you want it to include some of the things that there'll be in the Xpack?
2) Would you be available to make some test when the Vanilla version is ready? The work of adding the things is quick (especially if you don't want it any addition of the Xpack), but the testing and balancing work is quite long. In fact it means watching how a game develops, make the corrections, start a new game, and on and on. You could speed up this process.

to everybody: I'll start working now, beginning from the UUs and the new unit paths. Expect a biq (with no animation and no civilopedia) soon.

er.... I didn't really get that... 1) I think the Xpack... 2) I can test it, but I'm not good at mod-making... =/ but it would be fun if I can help with SOMETHING :)

The 1) depends on what are the reasons for you'd like in the Vanilla version:
-for the loading times, the world map and the new graphics
-or for the units that will be added in the pack (keep in mind that there will be no new Civs in the Vanilla version, as the maximum n. of civs in that case is 16 :( )

er... I like Vanilla cause I don't got some expansion :) now, it's time for bed! goodnight!

I think someone who knows what there doing (not me) should make a new mod:
Rhye's and Rule

jigga wha?

I believe there was a vesel called a Gallivat (pronounced galley-wot) used from about 1700 that might be applicable as an Indian pirate vesel UU.

Oh and on early discussions about colonial wonders - one could be the British East India Company.

Thank you very much Metatron, I'll try to find some photos (have you got any)?

After solving the problem of India, I'll send the v0.1 of the add-on to the testers.

Rhye's and Rule


Lol that would be a great mod! :lol:

I wonder, what is it about world maps that makes the game slow down so much?

The first factor is the size: an increase of one side leads to a great increase of area.

100x100 -> 5000 tiles
140x140-> 9800 tiles
180x180-> 16200 tiles (can be beared with a fast computer)
256x256 -> 32768 tiles (unplayable)
312x312 -> 48672 tiles (you must be crazy :crazyeye: )


but this isn't the only factor.

Rhye, why is your location saying USSR when you are from Italy?

KOC

Because Livorno is known as the 'italian Stalingrad'. People from Livorno feel more russian than italian :rolleyes:

:spear:

Something of that sort?

I've sent to Blasphemous, Aeon, Asclepius and Jaguar the first tweak to the biq, with no civilopedia and no unit animation (I'll add them while you examine the biq).

For now you can see the new UUs, the new unit upgrade paths, the new unit stats, the new added units for every civ (for now Dhow, Urban Militia, Galleass, Partisan, Lancer, Biplane).
If I can I'll post tomorrow for everybody the screenshots of all the 31 UUs (still not definitive).

Religions, techs and flavour units will come later, this is only the first step.
Please notice that many units will be moved to other added techs. In particular units that come with Feudalism and Military Tradition will be split.

Oooh fun.
One thing that caught my attention is the Pikeman stats of 3/3/1... From a realistic standpoint the attack should not improve in the upgrade from Spear to Pike... Pikemen are way more bulky than spearmen (judging by the animation at least) and their weapon was designed purely for defense (against knights, in particular - a job it was especially effective at).
I see the naval units' stats have been tweaked (either that or I've completely forgotten the stats that I've been playing with over the last couple days)... I would expect the Transport to be able to defend itself against wooden ships seeing as it seems to have a mounted machinegun that can put a real hurting on an unprotected sailing crew.
I still think that Legionaries should be extra-expensive and extra-powerful (4/2/1 +1HP @50s) making them appear in small numbers to great effect.
Immortals could be regular spearmen only with +1 HP since originally it was a single unit that never seemed to die (for a few years, that is.) But the current way is fine as well. I won't complain, after I saw how awesome it was to have these guys for so cheap in my current game...
Why exactly are Men-at-Arms now called Urban Militia?
Do I assume correctly that the idea of Horse Archers is that they are slightly early knights that don't need Iron?
The new UUs are for the most part absolutely amazing. :goodjob:
Why does the longship have a worker strength and no transport capacity? O_o

Alright, I'm looking through the biq now.

Firstly, the Longship has movement of 1. Am I missing something here?

Secondly, with regards to Junk and Galley: They seem to be more or less identical, except the Junk costs less, and they upgrade a little differently. Also, they're both available to all civs. Shouldn't Galleys be for Europe and the Mediterranean, and Junks for the Far East?

Oooh fun.
One thing that caught my attention is the Pikeman stats of 3/3/1... From a realistic standpoint the attack should not improve in the upgrade from Spear to Pike... Pikemen are way more bulky than spearmen (judging by the animation at least) and their weapon was designed purely for defense (against knights, in particular - a job it was especially effective at).
...
Why exactly are Men-at-Arms now called Urban Militia?
...
The new UUs are for the most part absolutely amazing. :goodjob:
Why does the longship have a worker strength and no transport capacity? O_o
Blasphemous is right on with these comments.

I agree that 2/3/1 is a little better for Pikemen than 3/3/1. Making units stronger at one thing than another encourages combined arms. However, 2/3/1 makes them more similar to Crossbowmen, so it's a tough call to make. Perhaps 2/3/1 and a little cheaper...

Urban Militia is not a good name. It sounds too modern.

I love the new UUs. They are truly unique, instead of just adding bonus stats. The nuclear UUs, the Grand Armee, and everything.

Again, I think you need to look at the longship. It seems like you were making its stats, got distracted, and never finished with them.

I hurried some of the stats, and that's the case of the longship.
Basically it should be a stronger galley (2 defense) as it has to face bad seas. And it is not wheeled.
In fact now the ocean is impassable by wheeled unit (galley, dromon, trireme, bireme, curragh).

The new added sea units are the junk and the galleass, for one reason:
after browsing A LOT of pages on the web, I realized that there's a huge distinction between oar vessels and sailing-only vessels.
And there's no reason for having a mediterranean galley for all the civs. I've chosen the junk as the generic ancient sailing ship, which has one bonus (is not wheeled, so it can touch the ocean) and one malus (doesn't ignore coast movement cost (now raised to 2, which instead is ignored by manouvrable oar-vessels)).
The galleass is the upgrade of the galleys, as it has a row of oars.

About the urban militia -> the name isn't modern, as I took it from Medieval total war. It's the generic medieval infantry, cheap, non-armoured. It won't have the original med.infantry animation, that instead represents the man-at-arms (basically a dismounted knight). This unit is very important in the line that goes from a 3/1/1 swordsman with no iron to partisan, guerrilla, etc.

About the pikeman -> that was a very difficult stats to choose. Forget their previous role in Civ3: now the archers are defensive. Pikemen were excellent attackers versus infantry, and excellent defenders versus cavalry. And they are armoured. A 3/3/1+iron allows them not to interfere with crossbowmen (1/3/1) or urban militia (3/2/1) role. And offers nice upgrades (4/3/1 tercio, 3/4/1 samurai).

About the legionary -> now they cost +10 gold, while the rest of the swordsmen are 3/1/1, so they have a +2 defense! Better a 4/2/1? Surely not a 4/3/1 (too unbalancing)

About the horse archers -> as I've added the lancer, I've got 2 "napoleonic" cavalry units, and so a new medieval unit was needed. At first I thought of adding a "light knight" that upgrades to the lancer (light cavalry).
Instead I decided to make horse archers upgrade to cavalry (ranged cavalry) and the other chain is horseman-knight-lancer (melee units)

I think that 4/2/1 is better for them (they were never meant to hold ground, they conquered and other parts of the roman army held what they conquered for the most part.) Also please consider giving them +1HP and making them cost another 10 extra shields, to represent they were elite soldiers, ahrd to train, hard to kill.

by the way, immortals weren't called that way because they were strong, but because they were 10'000. For each casuality there was another unit. This is why they are cheap.

blasphemous, is Merkava correct? Or is it Mervaka 4?

RE Immortals: I didn't say they were strong, they just never seemed to die because, as you said, their ranks were replenished down to the soldier before every battle. And they were, by the way, hand-picked elite soldiers, not just any other bunch of fighting men.

RE Merkava: I'm pretty sure it's Merkava mk. 4. I can look into it tomorrow if you want.

Legions WERE meant to hold ground (legion towns? Caesar in Gaul? primary roadbuilders and fortification builders for rome?) , and Rhye keep the Pike stats as is. Think swiss pikes everyone! And that was the standard goal of all Pikes! Think Phalanx! Macedonian Phalanxes in Alex's Persian Campaigns fought against...

A) Large numbers of horsies?
B) Large numbers of soldiers, mostly infantry (IE: PERSIAN ARMY)
C) A small blue bunny?

(Hint hint, go with C!) ;p

I will admit to not knowing much about the Immortals, but I can say that they were a unit designed with the standard goal of creating a group of men who were so tightly bound that they would not flee due to their love for one another (Theban Companions style).

Also, Rhye, I did NOT get the BIQ. I AM SLAVERING!!!

May I have a look at your modifications of 2.33?

I've been busy the past few days, so I haven't be able to get back to you. As you've elaborated on some of the changes you're making, I noticed we are both pretty much heading in the same direction. I could send or post(I'm not sure if or how to do this) what I've done, but mostly so far I've only added about 70 units (almost all flavor)(w/ civ entrees, research for the most part) and altered the ruleset and your map(using maptweaker as you suggested, its worked out great). I'm afriad looked at right now in the editor, it won't make much sense; I've started with the minute and will work my way up to the big picture. I'll hopefully be done in a week, but if you really want to look at it now, or take some of the unit files/pedia/civ entries, and can sent part or the whole. I really have no probablem if you want to canabalize it. We are both making some similar ajustments.
About the urban militia -> the name isn't modern, as I took it from Medieval total war. It's the generic medieval infantry, cheap, non-armoured. It won't have the original med.infantry animation, that instead represents the man-at-arms (basically a dismounted knight).
ha, i added the same unit, right down to the name taken from Total War. You're using Kinboat's Medieval Resistor, right? with the pitchfork? It fills a good role as cheap, resource-free infantry.

Rhye, I was wondering could you release an updated version of 2.62 with the terrain fixed in North America and wine you were talking about, also with the new barbairians placed without barbarian huts? Or are you only doing this for the Xpack?

KOC

or just erase America as a civ and add native tribes as civs.

Rhye, I was wondering could you release an updated version of 2.62 with the terrain fixed in North America and wine you were talking about, also with the new barbairians placed without barbarian huts? Or are you only doing this for the Xpack?

KOC

Not for the Xpack, it will be the 2.63, together with the new Elephant Archer animation (currently in progress by DomPedroII). I'm waiting for it, because otherwise I'd have to release another patch when it comes out.


I'll hopefully be done in a week, but if you really want to look at it now, or take some of the unit files/pedia/civ entries, and can sent part or the whole. I really have no probablem if you want to canabalize it. We are both making some similar ajustments.


I don't want to copy anything, as I've quite clear ideas on what to do. I said that because in case I have some troubles it could be helpful


ha, i added the same unit, right down to the name taken from Total War. You're using Kinboat's Medieval Resistor, right? with the pitchfork? It fills a good role as cheap, resource-free infantry.


No I'm not using it, that seems a ploughman in jeans. I'll use flavour culture-specific cheap non-armoured medieval infantry

Also, Rhye, I did NOT get the BIQ. I AM SLAVERING!!!

Didn't you? Is the mail (aeon221@hotmail.com) correct?

Right a bit of research has revealed two ships used by indian pirates. One was a small oared and sailed vessel called a gallivat but the second (probably better) is a large sailed vessel called a ghrab (or grab).

http://www.atributetohinduism.com/images/ships_mahratta.jpg

The small vessels are gallivats and the large sailed ones on the left and centre right are Ghrabs. The one with the large flag at mast head, in the centre, being an English vessel.

http://www.atributetohinduism.com/images/grab2.jpg

Above is another image of a ghrab.

http://www.atributetohinduism.com/images/native_vessel.jpg

Above is another gallivat.

These ships were powerfully armed and were the only none-european navies to ever defeat the colonial powers. They crushed a Dutch expeditionary fleet in 1742. The Ghrab was such a good vessel that it actually influenced european ship building for decades to come.


BTW in a recent game of RoC (latest patch) the aztecs built the pyramids, is this meant to happen? Have you considered including some meso-american wonders (like the chechen Itza) and maybe Cacau (cocoa) as a resource - necessary to build them.

I don't know what second UU you have selected for England but have you considered Welsh longbowmen (they were the finest archers of the medieval period and what defeated the french in the 100 years war).

-> Thank you very much. The most similar unit animation available in this forum to the gallivat is the dhow. Instead, the grab has no similar animation, except for the corvette (but it's only the privateer without the logo).
The best animation will decide which unit to use.

-> England 2nd UU is the longbowman. (replaces the crossbowman)

-> Yes, Aztecs can build pyramids because they have access to incense. In the pack one or two meso-american wonders will surely be added.

for you Rhye, dont bother with that one. Go with eeline@thehill.org

Hahahahhaha Hotmail hid it in junk ;p

It was right between an enlargement ad and a *naughty picture* ad, so I skipped over it by accident ;p

Will check out Immediately!!!

Errrr... I seem to be missing the Art Folder... rather a bugger really... ;p

Or did I screw something up?

I did not send any animation or civilopedia (read the mail!), only the stats.

Scratch what I said about the Roman Legions... I kinda realized it was probably wrong as I was writing it (mainly because I remembered Caesar in Gaul)... As usual it was probably a scrap of misinformation left in my head after reading something about it somewhere here in the forums... Bleh.
I say, make them 3/3/1 +1HP. Make the cost 20 more than that of a Swordsman. They will be worth their price.
But then again, of course, Rome has no chance to rise to its imperial glory because it's yet-unborn successor is blocking its path to the north and to the east. *Insert lesser reasons to remove Byzantines from the game.*

i need some test on the war wagon (can it transport units?), the kamikaze (destroyed after attacking?), the grande armée (does the leader create it? or the standard amy?; can it contain 5 units?)

Here's my Europe map. Russia and the Ukraine isn't finished (I dont have a map on European Russia) and only Britain, Greece, Anatolia, Israel and Egypt has resources. If anyone wants to help with the map feel free to add to it (If anyone can finish Russia that would help a lot).

chutchy did you see my mail?

I have read the e-mail you sent.

and so...? Do you want to join the list?

btw, the map is good. Some quick suggestions:
-add malta
-retouch iberian and british coasts
-Berlin and Vienna seem too close compared to real.

I'll join the list.
The problem with Vienna is that I drew the mountain ranges in the Balkans and the Alps too large, so it pushes countries north. Germany, Poland, and the Czech Republic were made smaller.. I made Wales and South West England smaller, made Ireland a bit larger, and changed the Portuguese coast a bit. The map is supposed to be curved, which is why Britain and Spain are distorted.

Why don't you use the map tweaker? It's the perfect tool for this kind of things: it can shift, copy and paste. Remember to save uncompressed biqs and remove the starting locations before editing with it.
You'll find it in the utilities forum

I'll try that.

Rhye, I think at least in the xpack Flak should need Motorized Transport and not Advanced Flight... It makes more sense for a nation to be able to defend itself from planes even if it hasn't built planes yet, and this outweighs the fact that nations will be building Flaks before a single bomber has been built... In addition, I would say that Flight symbolizes a later stage than the very beginning of flight, and that there was already a need for some form of defense against aircrafts before biplanes started showing up.

Keep in mind that some techs will change.
Adv.flight was a mistake. They can go in flight or mot.transportation or mass production (where the zeppelin is)
So the question is...are you sure that flaks existed before the invention of biplanes? Were there flaks to shot baloons?

Keep in mind that some techs will change.
Adv.flight was a mistake. They can go in flight or mot.transportation or mass production (where the zeppelin is)
So the question is...are you sure that flaks existed before the invention of biplanes? Were there flaks to shot baloons?
No, I'm actually pretty sure the Flak was not around in WWI, but I suppose it represents earlier anti-air weapons as well. If the Zeppelin is in Mass Production then put the Flak in there as well. Or perhaps add a new unit there to represent the earliest anti-air weapons, if you can find info on them.

Antiaircraft weapons development began as early as 1910, when the airplane first became an effective weapon. In World War I, field artillery pieces up to about 90 mm (3.5 inches) in calibre were converted to antiaircraft use by mountings that enabled them to fire nearly vertically. Aiming methods were inadequate, however, and in the interwar decades great progress was made in the development of range finders, searchlights, time fuzes, and gunlaying mechanisms to help artillery pieces hit the rapidly moving targets presented by aircraft.
In World War II, rapid-firing and automatic antiaircraft guns were introduced, radar was applied to target tracking, and tiny radio-wave proximity fuzes exploded the ammunition as it approached the target. Against dive-bombers and low-level attack aircraft, a 40-millimetre (1.5-inch) gun, first produced by the Bofors firm of Sweden, was widely used by the British and U.S. forces. It fired 2-pound (0.9-kilogram) projectiles to a height of 2 miles (3.2 km) at 120 rounds per minute. The Soviets based their 37-millimetre weapon on this gun. Heavier antiaircraft guns, up to 120 mm, were used against high-flying bombers. The most effective of these was the German 88-millimetre Fliegerabwehrkanone; its abbreviated name, flak, became a universal term for antiaircraft fire.

The first anti aircraft gun was made in 1910, but were convertied artillery. Fliegerabwehrkanone (Flak) were German 88-millimetre anti aircraft guns and were the most effective anti aircraft guns of World War II.
What he said. xD
Sounds like an early anti air unit called Anti-Air Artillery available with Mass Production, with stats of 0/3/1 and aa defense of 1 that costs the same as regular Artillery (meaning it's overpriced because it's used differently from its original purpouse) would fit in just fine, mebbe with limited normal bombard to balance it out with the high price and make it a bit more useful. It would at least give a fighting chance against the first few nations with bombers.

This mod sounds like the best ever; I'd love to play it but have been unable to so far. I unzipped the 4 newest files to Civ/conquests/scenarios and RoC showed up in my list of scenarios. But it crashed when it was uunable to find some kind of ancient temple(?). I have C3C 1.22; what am I doing wrong? Thanx for any help.

This mod sounds like the best ever; I'd love to play it but have been unable to so far. I unzipped the 4 newest files to Civ/conquests/scenarios and RoC showed up in my list of scenarios. But it crashed when it was uunable to find some kind of ancient temple(?). I have C3C 1.22; what am I doing wrong? Thanx for any help.

When did you download the files? More than two days ago? In that case you need to download them again, I'm sorry.
In fact I replaced the four files 2 days ago because they contained wrong folders. Let me knoe if that isn't the case: I'll try to install the mod myself from the files and see what's wrong

What he said. xD
Sounds like an early anti air unit called Anti-Air Artillery available with Mass Production, with stats of 0/3/1 and aa defense of 1 that costs the same as regular Artillery (meaning it's overpriced because it's used differently from its original purpouse) would fit in just fine, mebbe with limited normal bombard to balance it out with the high price and make it a bit more useful. It would at least give a fighting chance against the first few nations with bombers.

If the first ever was built in 1910, then it must go to flight (the first airplane was built in 1903 iirc)

BTW I'm a unit creator now! I'm creating a balloon unit, an advanced scout. So the Zeppelin will replace it instead of the bomber

(finally realized my mistakes... ;p)

I left all my favorite history books at home, so this is just what I have in my head right now. I will try and go through all the units, but I really do not know enough about game intricacies to suggest changes in resources and whatnot. What I am saying here is based not on game balance, but on my knowledge of history, so take it however you want ;p

Concentrating on the Crossbow... it seems weaker than it should be on the attack. I know this will seem a bit odd for the game, but why not make the pike a 3/2 and the Crossbow a 2/3? It will make them a perfect combo that basically equals the legion when used in conjunction. It will certainly give people a reason to go combigned (and therefore logical) arms, rather than simply mass produce the pikes.

Riflemen attack strength is too high; if you look at the Crimean War (1850s) or the American Civil War (1860s) you will notice that they are simply not nearly as good on the assault as they are on the defensive. Think about it; an advancing soldier cannot aim as well, cannot take cover as easily (considering the formations used for advancement at the time) and cannot reload as well as a soldier on the defensive, who is likely behind cover and lying down.

Pickett's Charge vs. Chamberlain's holding of Little Round Top.

Clearly, a far more effective defender than attacker, which is why you should leave it at 4/6

Another suggestion is the weakening of Cav. Arty was WAYY more important, and by the time of the 1800s (and really even the 1700s and before) Cavalry was already useless in direct assaults. It was almost entirely a scouting and harrasment unit, useful mostly for hitting an enemy on the run or burning his stuff.

Even in classical times, cavalry was pretty shoddy stuff. The Romans easily crushed the Kataphracti (means ovens I believe, I know for certain that Roman troops did call them that, refers to their heavy armor) of the Persians, finding that it was the light cavalry that did the most damage, as they were able to disengage and reengage easily.

Light cavalry has always beaten infantry, and heavy cavalry has only ever been useful against unformed or undisciplined troops (main reason why Roman Legions only had a 600 horse detachment with each 4-6 thousand man legion), or as a flanking unit in the age of the lance (Alexander of Macedon used his cavalry in just such a fashion).

This is why I am pushing for a reduction of Cav power from 6 to 4 (I will leave the other horsemen alone, but I have nothing but contempt for cavalry in a combat situation), and an increase in the power of artillery in general (cannons and up) to make assaults more dependent upon it.

As Napoleon said, "God favors the side with the heaviest artillery"

Just as a suggestion, why not give all combat vessels the ability to hold one unit, up until the metal kind? One frequently reads of British Marines being dispatched from this Frigate, or American soldiers from that 76 Gunner, but cannot do so in Civ. There has always been a marine complement to warships (and I am 98% certain that there are still marines detached to all warships in America, although not many on all of them) which was capable of landing and attacking or whatnot. Just a suggestion...

I agree that the Legion deserves a hit point upgrade, simply to respect their massive advantage over contemporaries in terms of training during the Late Republic and early Imperial period.

Also, I would suggest making the Immortal extremely cheap, as the Persians were renowned for the size of their army (Pre-Alexander times), and as this seems to be the primary way to give them a huge flavor army, then it would make sense for them to have a great number of them.

Also, in regards to the Tomahawk warriors... can't we find something a little more Native American in name? I mean seriously, it seems a bit on the degratory side. We have traditional names for things like the Chinese Oromo horseman (someth